[15.87] A mandatory injunction is one that commands the defendant to do a specific act: it is to be distinguished from a prohibitory injunction, which simply restrains him from doing something. As we have seen, the traditional reluctance of the courts to grant mandatory injunctions has dwindled; today they are generally granted on the same principles as prohibitory injunctions. It is true that in Redland Bricks Ltd v Morris, Redland Bricks Ltd v Morris [1970] AC 652 HL. Lord Upjohn said that in the case of a mandatory injunction the plaintiff had to show upon the facts a ‘very strong probability’ that grave damage would occur to him in the future. The decision has, however, been strongly criticised. Meagher Gummow & Lehane, Equity: Doctrines and Remedies (4th edn, LexisNexis Butterworths, 2002), pp 809–810 describe Lord Upjohn’s speech as ‘an example of judicial atavism’ and say that it ‘scintillates with not ...